Cambridge Independent Press 26 Feb 1909: P.S. Pallant's speed trap

MOTORIST TRAPPED AT

TRUMPINGTON.

LONDON DRIVER FINED

At the Cambridge Division Petty Sessions on Saturday, before Lieut.-Colonel Hurrell (in the chair) and other magistrates, Percival George Sherlock, motor car driver, of 359 Edgware-road, London, was summoned for driving a motor car at a speed dangerous to the public in the main street of Trumpington village on Feb 14th - Mr. A. V. Clements appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty.

P. s. Pallant stated that on the previous Sunday he was timing motor cars over a measured distance of a quarter of a mile through the populous part of the village of Trumpington. Witness could see any car that came along 25 yards before it came to the measured distance. A car driven by defendant came into sight, and witness stated that his stopwatch, which registered 33 seconds when the car reached witness, who was standing 49 yards outside of the measured distance. Witness had the car stopped. There were three ladies and a gentleman in the car. Within the measured distance there were 17 persons on the road and seven cyclists, and within the distance there were 43 houses, 10 of which abutted right on to the road.

Cross-examined, witness said that there were danger signals at Harston and Shelford, but there were none just outside Trumpington.

P. c. Martin gave corroborative evidence, and, answering Mr. Clements, he said that he did not hear the owner of this car, Mr. Armstrong, ask what the charge against them would be. All he heard him say was, “We should look all right if we were snapshotted now.”

P. c. Hiner stated that he kept a record of the traffic that passed over the road between 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. There were 19 vehicles, 206 cyclists, and 303 foot passengers.

Defendant gave evidence, and said that in summer there was likely to be more traffic on the road than in the winter. He did not think he was driving at a dangerous speed. He would not be prepared to dispute the speed, because he had no speedometer on the car, as it was being repaired.

Mr. Clements, addressing the Magistrates, argued that what might be deemed quite rightly to be dangerous speed in the summer need not necessarily be dangerous speed in the winter, because there was not likely to be so much traffic on the road then. He pointed out that there were no danger signals at the spot, which was presumptive evidence that the County Council did not deem it necessary to put them up.

The Bench fined defendant £2 and 12s. 6d. costs.